Wil Wheaton is hiding somewhere in this official portrait of Kim Jong Un and pals. From photoshopwilwheaton.tumblr.com

So the Men’s Rights movement has faced some setbacks in the past. The Southern Poverty Law Center profiling them as a movement filled with hate (if not literally a hate group by the SPLC’s strict definition). Events that literally no one showed up to. Paul Elam.

But MRAs have never faced anything quite like this.

Wil Wheaton — yes, that Wil Wheaton, the one who was on Star Trek TNG — has stated publicly that he thinks they’re a bunch of idiots:

@KendraCP@TechnicallyRon The Men’s Rights crowd are the biggest bunch of idiots I have ever accidentally noticed in my life.

Naturally, this tweet has the fellas in the Men’s Rights subreddit feeling hurt and angry. Well, they always feel hurt and angry, so I guess I mean they feel even more hurt and angry than usual, with a lot of this hurt and anger directed in a Wil-Wheatony direction.

Here are some of their comments. I don’t really have any jokes to make about them because, I mean, just read them. I can’t top this sort of ridiculousness.

Click on the individual comments to see them in context on Reddit. Oh, and note that this comment at the top has MORE THAN ONE HUNDRED UPVOTES.

Also, I would bet a mint-in-box Wesley Crusher action figure that Wheaton didn’t call you guys “idiots” because he wanted to pander to “pussy” but rather because you are the sorts of guys who routinely refer to women as “pussy.”

The issue with life expectancy is that it is an average, and so the longer one lives, the longer one is expected to live, because mortality sources and associated probabilities change with age. And if you live to be 75, then clearly you didn’t die at a younger age. But this is a mathematical argument and I don’t expect many MRAs to be able to understand it.

These findings suggest that violence and use of firearms, as well as drug and alcohol use, are important contributors to the sex difference in mortality and that public health efforts targeting these factors could dramatically close the sex gap in life expectancy. Men are much more likely than women to use drugs and alcohol and approximately 75% of homicides are related to the use of drugs or alcohol or the selling of illicit drugs. Furthermore, about half of all deaths from motor vehicle accidents among men are related to the use of alcohol, compared to 33% among women. Although women are almost twice as likely to be diagnosed with major depression and three times more likely to attempt suicide than men, men are more likely to successfully commit suicide. This difference occurs partly because men are more likely to use effective methods such as firearms or hanging, and tend to use drugs and alcohol, which increase impulsive behavior.

And salicfee is indeed Kitt. Either that or they’re BFFs with identical writing styles and opinions posting from the exact same location in Germany.

Oh, Kitt, all you had to do to stay unnbanned and make it through moderation was to actually read and respond to other people’s comments. And use the word “blorfle.” But instead you sockpuppeted, so you’re banned forever.

2) Feminists proceed to separate politicians into discrete categories by nothing other than their genitalia (who cares about policies, right? And that’s totally not sexist of course).

Only anti-trans feminists reduce gender to genitalia, not trans-supportive ones. You won’t find many anti-trans folks here. In any case, distinguishing between men and women is not sexist, and feminists don’t argue that their gender literally determines their views completely. It’s just that, in a society in which men have power for being men, they are more likely to work for policies that favor men, so the division is relevant for political analysis.

3) Feminists compare numbers on each side and notice more men than women. [applause]
4) Feminists cry “SEXISM! Misogyny, Patriarchy! Men and women are EQUAL. There should be as many women in politics as men and anything else is sexist.
5) Non feminist appears and asks “ok then what about the disparity in, say, lifespan, or prison sentencing or education? If men and women are equal, shouldn’t those be equal too?”

That’s not what feminists mean by “women are equal” in that context. It means that women are equally capable in the political sphere. Straw man.

Really no need to thank me. You’re MORE than welcome 😀

No need to thank a smug dipshit like you. You have nothing interesting or valuable to say here.

My mourning period over losing Kitt was very brief.
I am a little taken aback that someone from Germany throws around the term “fascist” as an insult so easily. It’s not surprising when a lunkheaded American with no historical knowledge uses terms like fascist and nazi because they have no sense of the real history and import of those words. You’d think a German would know better, but Kitt was dolt and I guess that countered any cultural awareness.

Since BB69 has flounced, I’d like to point to one of his earlier posts.
buttboy69 on January 21, 2014 at 7:44 pm

I post at r/mensrights. I don’t believe in so-called “male privilege” at all. But yes, even though I post at r/mr, I recognize that the benefits associated with being female are ultimately minor when stacked up against money.

He hates when people discuss other social oppressions on tumblr (and here) but he hangs on a board where a bunch of guys complain about how gendered oppression either ruined, or in the future will ruin, their lives. That makes a ton of sense.

I remain confused as to what angry misogynists think feminists are supposed to do about the difference in lifespan between men and women. Are we just supposed to go kill some old ladies when they reach the average age at which men die?

The different diets men and women have might affect lifespan, though I’m not a scientist, I’m just speculating. Greasy, meaty, dairy-based foods are often considered “manly”, and it’s considered “manly” to eat tons of it too. Women who do the same are shamed for being slobs. Also men who are vegetarian or go on diets might be bullied for being “pussies”, further enforcing the idea that crappy foods = manly.
Also even in “healthy” eating, many men eat like shit tons of protein powder to bulk up, which can be pretty hard on your organs.
It’s even in our language, like calling “feminine” men “fruity”, and “manly” men “beefy”/”beefcake”.

Gee, it’s almost like it’s toxic masculinity. And wowzers, it’s like that’s a feminist theory.

Gee, it’s not like I became poor due to mental illness snowballing into disability into unemployment into homelessness or anything. And I’m sure those things had nothing to do with my being trans! (Though that’s complicated and massively subsumed in the multi.)

So Buttboy has decided rather than to directly respond to the various comments made in response to some of his posts, he would go cry wolf over on Reddit and just cherry pick comments out of context to make commenters look bad. Not sure how they think his comments are even worthy of elevating, but he’s against feminism and manboobz so I guess who cares wtf bullshit he writes (?) /MRA logic

I don’t think that that’s really the case because that particular form of masculinity is not universal, but the gap in lifespans is. The universality of the gap makes me think biological moreso than cultural, but I haven’t done any research into the matter.

Typical, innit … they scream about BIOTRUTHS!!! and how things they claim are biology are cast-iron reasons why nothing should ever change. But mention something that’s 1) genuine biology and 2) isn’t in men’s favour, and it’s all frothrage about how it’s women’s fault.

Yes, it’s been a shock for us all. I’ve been rending my clothes in grief myself. Now I can’t go out because the gynocratic femgovernment of Canada, led by that uberfeminist puppet Harper, has criminalized the male body in an attempt to increase the lifespan gap by even more decades. This is clearly an attempt to make sure men die as soon as we can no longer serve as boy-toys.

Typical, innit … they scream about BIOTRUTHS!!! and how things they claim are biology are cast-iron reasons why nothing should ever change. But mention something that’s 1) genuine biology and 2) isn’t in men’s favour, and it’s all frothrage about how it’s women’s fault.

I am sooooo surprised.

That’s why (well one of dozens) why they have earned zero credibility .Didn’t we just get a “fresh lecture” by but boy on how biologically different men and women are ? The testosterone rule ? How that in of itself sets also behaviors (hard wired of course) in motion ?

But then when one of their violations of their “human man rights” and on the list of their “oppressions ” is that on average men don’t live as long as women DO NOT mention any biological reasons hence unavoidable let alone any behaviors (free will chosen behaviors ) that contribute. Its has to be women are killing men off somehow because misandry . It has to be “inequality because feminist aren’t really about equality .”

Lol! I’ll take her! Late 18th century corsets are awesome, and my thoughts on body hair are basically “yeah whatever” (except I have a weird thing against chest hair, this has somehow never really been an issue, idk how my ex BF’s have all been mostly hairless, but they have)

Now, a shower might be nice, but lady BO isn’t always foul so I guess it depends on the lady in question and just how long ago her last bath was.

Care to explain what you mean by “exposed” when you say that “Anita, Will, and Johnathan, have been exposed several dozen times”? Cause all I’ve ever seen the parade of jerks you mention do is complain about things they don’t like on the internet. I’ve never found them to be very convincing. Care to give some more details?

Ranting about people you disagree with isn’t exposing them, regardless of whether or not you had a point, which, to be clear, none of those guys do. To “expose” someone is to reveal something damning about them that wasn’t clear before. I’m pretty sure the fact that Anita Sharkeesian raised money to make feminists videos isn’t news to anyone familiar with her.

But assuming that “exposed” to you means “criticized in any way”, then pretty much every prominent MRA has been exposed on this site, which negates any future criticism of David, at least according to your logic, right? Right?

I’m not willing to watch a TAA or Tf00t video under anything short of Clockwork Orange levels of duress, so I’m just going to have to guess at how these prominent individuals have been exposed. Best theories:

Will Wheaton, EXPOSED! Actor discovered to be time traveller from 24th century named Wesley Crusher. Most of Star Trek: The Next Generation revealed to have been autobiographical.

Anita Sarkeesian, EXPOSED! Presumed-human Anita Sarkeesian is actually 5 goombas standing on top of one another. In order to defeat their eternal foes Mario and Luigi, the highly-organized goombas have been attempting bring down the entire video game industry through feminist critique.

Johnathan, EXPOSED! as being some random guy I don’t know anything about.

I can only assume that Chris made the classic blunder of assuming that “exposed” is a synonym for “gave exposure to”, as in, the listed youtubers drew attention to Anita and Wil and Jonathan (not a very good job with Jonathan though, I’m not sure who that person is). I can see why one would think that these two phrases are the same. They have the same root words, but the connotation is actually quite different. It’s okay, though. We all make mistakes.

We Hunted the Mammoth tracks and mocks the white male rage underlying the rise of Trump and Trumpism. This blog is NOT a safe space; given the subject matter -- misogyny and hate -- there's really no way it could be.